Tree of Heaven)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS FOR THE INVASIVE AILANTHUS ALTISSIMA (TREE OF HEAVEN) A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Kevin C. Lewis June 2007 © 2007 Kevin C. Lewis All Rights Reserved This thesis titled CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS FOR THE INVASIVE AILANTHUS ALTISSIMA (TREE OF HEAVEN) by KEVIN C. LEWIS has been approved for the Program of Environmental Studies and the College of Arts and Sciences by Brian C. McCarthy Professor of Environmental and Plant Biology Benjamin M. Ogles Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Abstract LEWIS, KEVIN C., M.S., June 2007. Environmental Studies CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS FOR THE INVASIVE AILANTHUS ALTISSIMA (TREE OF HEAVEN) (122 pp.) Director of Thesis: Brian C. McCarthy Ailanthus altissima Miller [Swingle] (tree of heaven) is a non-indigenous invasive plant that is aggressively competing with native vegetation throughout most of the United States. Proper management of this tree is required to protect and maintain biodiversity and ecological processes in the forests. I explored several possible methods to manage the spread of this invasive species, including herbicide injection, prescribed fire, and the combination of herbicide injection and prescribed fire. Additionally, I evaluated the potential for herbicide translocation from injected trees to neighboring non-injected woody species. Herbicide injection with imazapyr not only produced 100% mortality in the targeted A. altissima, but it also translocated and produced mortality in 17.5% of neighboring trees within 3 m. Herbicide injection with glyphosate killed small and medium-size trees, but it was not effective in killing large trees. Prescribed fire alone killed the above-ground stems, but the resprouts returned the stem density to the same pre-fire levels. Accordingly, fire is not recommended as a control strategy for A. altissima. Approved: _______________________________________________________ Brian C. McCarthy Acknowledgements I would like to sincerely thank the members of my research committee for their time, assistance, and patience with this research: Drs. Brian McCarthy, Arthur Trese, James Dyer, Joanne Rebbeck, and Nicole Cavender. I am further indebted to Nicole Cavender and the Wilds for providing a suitable research location and Joanne Rebbeck with the United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service – Northern Research Station for providing funding for this project. Additional research locations were also provided by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources – Division of Forestry. Finally, I would like to thank Rachel and Chuck Lewis for all of their valuable assistance with the field work. Although this research received no direct funding from the U.S. Joint Fire Service Program (JFSP), it could not have been accomplished without JFSP support of the existing National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) research project sites. 6 Table of Contents Page Abstract................................................................................................ 4 Acknowledgements.............................................................................. 5 List of Tables........................................................................................ 8 List of Figures....................................................................................... 9 1.Species biology and background....................................................... 14 1.1 Ecology and allelopathy............................................................. 17 1.2 Microbial degradation of phytotoxic compounds in the soil....... 20 1.3 Herbicidal control of Ailanthus altissima.................................... 21 1.4 Research objectives.................................................................. 25 1.5 Literature cited........................................................................... 27 2.Herbicide injection and control of the invasive tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima)................................................................... 34 2.1 Introduction................................................................................ 34 2.2 Methods..................................................................................... 35 2.3 Results....................................................................................... 36 2.4 Discussion................................................................................. 37 2.5 Management implications.......................................................... 38 2.6 Literature cited........................................................................... 41 3.Non-target tree mortality following tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) injection with imazapyr.............................................. 46 3.1 Abstract..................................................................................... 46 3.2 Introduction................................................................................ 47 3.3 Methods..................................................................................... 51 3.4 Results....................................................................................... 55 3.5 Discussion................................................................................. 58 3.6 Management implications.......................................................... 66 3.7 Literature cited........................................................................... 68 4.The interactive effects of fire and herbicide injection on the tree of heaven............................................................................ 83 4.1 Abstract..................................................................................... 83 4.2 Introduction................................................................................ 84 4.3 Methods..................................................................................... 89 4.4 Results....................................................................................... 94 7 Page 4.5 Discussion................................................................................. 95 4.6 Management implications.......................................................... 100 4.7 Literature cited........................................................................... 102 5.1 Summary of management implications.......................................... 120 8 List of Tables Page Table 2.1. Summary of 3-way loglinear analysis for E-Z-Ject® lance calibration......…………...............................................………...….................... 42 Table 3.1. Summary of 3-way loglinear model showing treatment effects and variable interactions for the distance of the non-injected stems from the injected stems, the DBH of the non-injected stems, and the species of the non-injected stems..........................…………..………………................. 77 9 List of Figures Page Figure 2.1. Diagram showing the three A. altissima stem diameter classes (small, medium, and large), measured at diameter breast height (DBH), and the six E-Z-Ject® lance herbicide capsule injection rates (one, two, three, four, five, or six) used in the experiment. Each of the 18 trial combinations for each herbicide was replicated 10 times. Herbicide capsules were evenly injected on the stem circumference at a height of ca. 10 cm above the ground. Shaded circles represent manufacturer’s recommended application rate (regardless of herbicide). Tick marks represent herbicide capsules....................................... 43 Figure 2.2. Mortality percentage (± SE) of tree of heaven stems for small, medium, and large trees 62 wks after herbicide injection with the E-Z-Ject® lance. Each trial combination was replicated n = 10 times....… 44 Figure 2.3 Herbicide comparison illustrating the mortality percentage (± SE) for the significant interaction (P < 0.001) between herbicide type and tree size 62 wks after herbicide injection in A. altissima.........................................…… 45 10 Page Figure 3.1 Percentage of neighboring non-injected stems (N = 360) showing canopy damage and defoliation (mean ± SE) in response to A. altissima injection with imazapyr. Complete canopy defoliation was used as a surrogate for stem mortality. Stem diameters ranged from 0.8 to 15.0 cm. Ailanthus altissima was injected June 2004 and the 12, 50, and 62 weeks after treatment correlates with Sept 2004, May 2005, and Sept 2005, respectively..………………………….................… 78 Figure 3.2. Percent mortality and distance of neighboring non-injected stems (N = 360) 62 weeks after A. altissima injection with imazapyr. The total number of stems in each distance class include: 0 – 1.0 m (n = 62); 1.1 – 2.0 m (n = 151); and 2.1 – 3.0 m (n = 147). Intra- and interspecific mortality graphs are presented exclusively to provide insight into data trends and were not subjected to statistical analyses.……………...............… 79 Figure 3.3. Percent mortality and diameter at breast height (dbh) of neighboring non-injected stems (N = 360) 62 weeks after A. altissima injection with imazapyr. The total number of stems in each size class include: 0 – 5.0 cm (n = 264); 5.1 – 10.0 cm (n = 77); and 10.1 – 15.0 cm (n = 19). Intra- and interspecific mortality graphs are presented exclusively to provide insight into data trends and were not subjected to statistical analyses........… 80 11 Page Figure 3.4. Percent mortality (mean